This adds support for one-to-many non-fragmenting relationships (with
planned paths for fragmenting and non-fragmenting many-to-many
relationships). "Non-fragmenting" means that entities with the same
relationship type, but different relationship targets, are not forced
into separate tables (which would cause "table fragmentation").
Functionally, this fills a similar niche as the current Parent/Children
system. The biggest differences are:
1. Relationships have simpler internals and significantly improved
performance and UX. Commands and specialized APIs are no longer
necessary to keep everything in sync. Just spawn entities with the
relationship components you want and everything "just works".
2. Relationships are generalized. Bevy can provide additional built in
relationships, and users can define their own.
**REQUEST TO REVIEWERS**: _please don't leave top level comments and
instead comment on specific lines of code. That way we can take
advantage of threaded discussions. Also dont leave comments simply
pointing out CI failures as I can read those just fine._
## Built on top of what we have
Relationships are implemented on top of the Bevy ECS features we already
have: components, immutability, and hooks. This makes them immediately
compatible with all of our existing (and future) APIs for querying,
spawning, removing, scenes, reflection, etc. The fewer specialized APIs
we need to build, maintain, and teach, the better.
## Why focus on one-to-many non-fragmenting first?
1. This allows us to improve Parent/Children relationships immediately,
in a way that is reasonably uncontroversial. Switching our hierarchy to
fragmenting relationships would have significant performance
implications. ~~Flecs is heavily considering a switch to non-fragmenting
relations after careful considerations of the performance tradeoffs.~~
_(Correction from @SanderMertens: Flecs is implementing non-fragmenting
storage specialized for asset hierarchies, where asset hierarchies are
many instances of small trees that have a well defined structure)_
2. Adding generalized one-to-many relationships is currently a priority
for the [Next Generation Scene / UI
effort](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/14437).
Specifically, we're interested in building reactions and observers on
top.
## The changes
This PR does the following:
1. Adds a generic one-to-many Relationship system
3. Ports the existing Parent/Children system to Relationships, which now
lives in `bevy_ecs::hierarchy`. The old `bevy_hierarchy` crate has been
removed.
4. Adds on_despawn component hooks
5. Relationships can opt-in to "despawn descendants" behavior, meaning
that the entire relationship hierarchy is despawned when
`entity.despawn()` is called. The built in Parent/Children hierarchies
enable this behavior, and `entity.despawn_recursive()` has been removed.
6. `world.spawn` now applies commands after spawning. This ensures that
relationship bookkeeping happens immediately and removes the need to
manually flush. This is in line with the equivalent behaviors recently
added to the other APIs (ex: insert).
7. Removes the ValidParentCheckPlugin (system-driven / poll based) in
favor of a `validate_parent_has_component` hook.
## Using Relationships
The `Relationship` trait looks like this:
```rust
pub trait Relationship: Component + Sized {
type RelationshipSources: RelationshipSources<Relationship = Self>;
fn get(&self) -> Entity;
fn from(entity: Entity) -> Self;
}
```
A relationship is a component that:
1. Is a simple wrapper over a "target" Entity.
2. Has a corresponding `RelationshipSources` component, which is a
simple wrapper over a collection of entities. Every "target entity"
targeted by a "source entity" with a `Relationship` has a
`RelationshipSources` component, which contains every "source entity"
that targets it.
For example, the `Parent` component (as it currently exists in Bevy) is
the `Relationship` component and the entity containing the Parent is the
"source entity". The entity _inside_ the `Parent(Entity)` component is
the "target entity". And that target entity has a `Children` component
(which implements `RelationshipSources`).
In practice, the Parent/Children relationship looks like this:
```rust
#[derive(Relationship)]
#[relationship(relationship_sources = Children)]
pub struct Parent(pub Entity);
#[derive(RelationshipSources)]
#[relationship_sources(relationship = Parent)]
pub struct Children(Vec<Entity>);
```
The Relationship and RelationshipSources derives automatically implement
Component with the relevant configuration (namely, the hooks necessary
to keep everything in sync).
The most direct way to add relationships is to spawn entities with
relationship components:
```rust
let a = world.spawn_empty().id();
let b = world.spawn(Parent(a)).id();
assert_eq!(world.entity(a).get::<Children>().unwrap(), &[b]);
```
There are also convenience APIs for spawning more than one entity with
the same relationship:
```rust
world.spawn_empty().with_related::<Children>(|s| {
s.spawn_empty();
s.spawn_empty();
})
```
The existing `with_children` API is now a simpler wrapper over
`with_related`. This makes this change largely non-breaking for existing
spawn patterns.
```rust
world.spawn_empty().with_children(|s| {
s.spawn_empty();
s.spawn_empty();
})
```
There are also other relationship APIs, such as `add_related` and
`despawn_related`.
## Automatic recursive despawn via the new on_despawn hook
`RelationshipSources` can opt-in to "despawn descendants" behavior,
which will despawn all related entities in the relationship hierarchy:
```rust
#[derive(RelationshipSources)]
#[relationship_sources(relationship = Parent, despawn_descendants)]
pub struct Children(Vec<Entity>);
```
This means that `entity.despawn_recursive()` is no longer required.
Instead, just use `entity.despawn()` and the relevant related entities
will also be despawned.
To despawn an entity _without_ despawning its parent/child descendants,
you should remove the `Children` component first, which will also remove
the related `Parent` components:
```rust
entity
.remove::<Children>()
.despawn()
```
This builds on the on_despawn hook introduced in this PR, which is fired
when an entity is despawned (before other hooks).
## Relationships are the source of truth
`Relationship` is the _single_ source of truth component.
`RelationshipSources` is merely a reflection of what all the
`Relationship` components say. By embracing this, we are able to
significantly improve the performance of the system as a whole. We can
rely on component lifecycles to protect us against duplicates, rather
than needing to scan at runtime to ensure entities don't already exist
(which results in quadratic runtime). A single source of truth gives us
constant-time inserts. This does mean that we cannot directly spawn
populated `Children` components (or directly add or remove entities from
those components). I personally think this is a worthwhile tradeoff,
both because it makes the performance much better _and_ because it means
theres exactly one way to do things (which is a philosophy we try to
employ for Bevy APIs).
As an aside: treating both sides of the relationship as "equivalent
source of truth relations" does enable building simple and flexible
many-to-many relationships. But this introduces an _inherent_ need to
scan (or hash) to protect against duplicates.
[`evergreen_relations`](https://github.com/EvergreenNest/evergreen_relations)
has a very nice implementation of the "symmetrical many-to-many"
approach. Unfortunately I think the performance issues inherent to that
approach make it a poor choice for Bevy's default relationship system.
## Followup Work
* Discuss renaming `Parent` to `ChildOf`. I refrained from doing that in
this PR to keep the diff reasonable, but I'm personally biased toward
this change (and using that naming pattern generally for relationships).
* [Improved spawning
ergonomics](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/16920)
* Consider adding relationship observers/triggers for "relationship
targets" whenever a source is added or removed. This would replace the
current "hierarchy events" system, which is unused upstream but may have
existing users downstream. I think triggers are the better fit for this
than a buffered event queue, and would prefer not to add that back.
* Fragmenting relations: My current idea hinges on the introduction of
"value components" (aka: components whose type _and_ value determines
their ComponentId, via something like Hashing / PartialEq). By labeling
a Relationship component such as `ChildOf(Entity)` as a "value
component", `ChildOf(e1)` and `ChildOf(e2)` would be considered
"different components". This makes the transition between fragmenting
and non-fragmenting a single flag, and everything else continues to work
as expected.
* Many-to-many support
* Non-fragmenting: We can expand Relationship to be a list of entities
instead of a single entity. I have largely already written the code for
this.
* Fragmenting: With the "value component" impl mentioned above, we get
many-to-many support "for free", as it would allow inserting multiple
copies of a Relationship component with different target entities.
Fixes#3742 (If this PR is merged, I think we should open more targeted
followup issues for the work above, with a fresh tracking issue free of
the large amount of less-directed historical context)
Fixes#17301Fixes#12235Fixes#15299Fixes#15308
## Migration Guide
* Replace `ChildBuilder` with `ChildSpawnerCommands`.
* Replace calls to `.set_parent(parent_id)` with
`.insert(Parent(parent_id))`.
* Replace calls to `.replace_children()` with `.remove::<Children>()`
followed by `.add_children()`. Note that you'll need to manually despawn
any children that are not carried over.
* Replace calls to `.despawn_recursive()` with `.despawn()`.
* Replace calls to `.despawn_descendants()` with
`.despawn_related::<Children>()`.
* If you have any calls to `.despawn()` which depend on the children
being preserved, you'll need to remove the `Children` component first.
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
# Objective
Continue improving the user experience of our UI Node API in the
direction specified by [Bevy's Next Generation Scene / UI
System](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/14437)
## Solution
As specified in the document above, merge `Style` fields into `Node`,
and move "computed Node fields" into `ComputedNode` (I chose this name
over something like `ComputedNodeLayout` because it currently contains
more than just layout info. If we want to break this up / rename these
concepts, lets do that in a separate PR). `Style` has been removed.
This accomplishes a number of goals:
## Ergonomics wins
Specifying both `Node` and `Style` is now no longer required for
non-default styles
Before:
```rust
commands.spawn((
Node::default(),
Style {
width: Val::Px(100.),
..default()
},
));
```
After:
```rust
commands.spawn(Node {
width: Val::Px(100.),
..default()
});
```
## Conceptual clarity
`Style` was never a comprehensive "style sheet". It only defined "core"
style properties that all `Nodes` shared. Any "styled property" that
couldn't fit that mold had to be in a separate component. A "real" style
system would style properties _across_ components (`Node`, `Button`,
etc). We have plans to build a true style system (see the doc linked
above).
By moving the `Style` fields to `Node`, we fully embrace `Node` as the
driving concept and remove the "style system" confusion.
## Next Steps
* Consider identifying and splitting out "style properties that aren't
core to Node". This should not happen for Bevy 0.15.
---
## Migration Guide
Move any fields set on `Style` into `Node` and replace all `Style`
component usage with `Node`.
Before:
```rust
commands.spawn((
Node::default(),
Style {
width: Val::Px(100.),
..default()
},
));
```
After:
```rust
commands.spawn(Node {
width: Val::Px(100.),
..default()
});
```
For any usage of the "computed node properties" that used to live on
`Node`, use `ComputedNode` instead:
Before:
```rust
fn system(nodes: Query<&Node>) {
for node in &nodes {
let computed_size = node.size();
}
}
```
After:
```rust
fn system(computed_nodes: Query<&ComputedNode>) {
for computed_node in &computed_nodes {
let computed_size = computed_node.size();
}
}
```
# Objective
The type `AssetLoadError` has `PartialEq` and `Eq` impls, which is
problematic due to the fact that the `AssetLoaderError` and
`AddAsyncError` variants lie in their impls: they will return `true` for
any `Box<dyn Error>` with the same `TypeId`, even if the actual value is
different. This can lead to subtle bugs if a user relies on the equality
comparison to ensure that two values are equal.
The same is true for `DependencyLoadState`,
`RecursiveDependencyLoadState`.
More generally, it is an anti-pattern for large error types involving
dynamic dispatch, such as `AssetLoadError`, to have equality
comparisons. Directly comparing two errors for equality is usually not
desired -- if some logic needs to branch based on the value of an error,
it is usually more correct to check for specific variants and inspect
their fields.
As far as I can tell, the only reason these errors have equality
comparisons is because the `LoadState` enum wraps `AssetLoadError` for
its `Failed` variant. This equality comparison is only used to check for
`== LoadState::Loaded`, which we can easily replace with an `is_loaded`
method.
## Solution
Remove the `{Partial}Eq` impls from `LoadState`, which also allows us to
remove it from the error types.
## Migration Guide
The types `bevy_asset::AssetLoadError` and `bevy_asset::LoadState` no
longer support equality comparisons. If you need to check for an asset's
load state, consider checking for a specific variant using
`LoadState::is_loaded` or the `matches!` macro. Similarly, consider
using the `matches!` macro to check for specific variants of the
`AssetLoadError` type if you need to inspect the value of an asset load
error in your code.
`DependencyLoadState` and `RecursiveDependencyLoadState` are not
released yet, so no migration needed,
---------
Co-authored-by: Joseph <21144246+JoJoJet@users.noreply.github.com>
# Objective
- closes#15866
## Solution
- Simply migrate where possible.
## Testing
- Expect that CI will do most of the work. Examples is another way of
testing this, as most of the work is in that area.
---
## Notes
For now, this PR doesn't migrate `QueryState::single` and friends as for
now, this look like another issue. So for example, QueryBuilders that
used single or `World::query` that used single wasn't migrated. If there
is a easy way to migrate those, please let me know.
Most of the uses of `Query::single` were removed, the only other uses
that I found was related to tests of said methods, so will probably be
removed when we remove `Query::single`.
# Objective
Currently text is recomputed unnecessarily on any changes to its color,
which is extremely expensive.
## Solution
Split up `TextStyle` into two separate components `TextFont` and
`TextColor`.
## Testing
I added this system to `many_buttons`:
```rust
fn set_text_colors_changed(mut colors: Query<&mut TextColor>) {
for mut text_color in colors.iter_mut() {
text_color.set_changed();
}
}
```
reports ~4fps on main, ~50fps with this PR.
## Migration Guide
`TextStyle` has been renamed to `TextFont` and its `color` field has
been moved to a separate component named `TextColor` which newtypes
`Color`.
# Objective
Since #15641, `loading_screen` panics.
```
called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: MultipleEntities("bevy_ecs::query::state::QueryState<&mut bevy_render::view::visibility::Visibility, bevy_ecs::query::filter::With<loading_screen::LoadingScreen>>")
```
Before that PR, the camera did not have a `Visibility` component. But
`Visibility` is now a required component of `Camera`. So the query
matches multiple entities.
## Solution
Minimal change to make the example behave like it used to.
Plus a tiny drive-by cleanup to remove a redundant unwrap.
## Testing
`cargo run --example loading_screen`
**Ready for review. Examples migration progress: 100%.**
# Objective
- Implement https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/15014
## Solution
This implements [cart's
proposal](https://github.com/bevyengine/bevy/discussions/15014#discussioncomment-10574459)
faithfully except for one change. I separated `TextSpan` from
`TextSpan2d` because `TextSpan` needs to require the `GhostNode`
component, which is a `bevy_ui` component only usable by UI.
Extra changes:
- Added `EntityCommands::commands_mut` that returns a mutable reference.
This is a blocker for extension methods that return something other than
`self`. Note that `sickle_ui`'s `UiBuilder::commands` returns a mutable
reference for this reason.
## Testing
- [x] Text examples all work.
---
## Showcase
TODO: showcase-worthy
## Migration Guide
TODO: very breaking
### Accessing text spans by index
Text sections are now text sections on different entities in a
hierarchy, Use the new `TextReader` and `TextWriter` system parameters
to access spans by index.
Before:
```rust
fn refresh_text(mut query: Query<&mut Text, With<TimeText>>, time: Res<Time>) {
let text = query.single_mut();
text.sections[1].value = format_time(time.elapsed());
}
```
After:
```rust
fn refresh_text(
query: Query<Entity, With<TimeText>>,
mut writer: UiTextWriter,
time: Res<Time>
) {
let entity = query.single();
*writer.text(entity, 1) = format_time(time.elapsed());
}
```
### Iterating text spans
Text spans are now entities in a hierarchy, so the new `UiTextReader`
and `UiTextWriter` system parameters provide ways to iterate that
hierarchy. The `UiTextReader::iter` method will give you a normal
iterator over spans, and `UiTextWriter::for_each` lets you visit each of
the spans.
---------
Co-authored-by: ickshonpe <david.curthoys@googlemail.com>
Co-authored-by: Carter Anderson <mcanders1@gmail.com>
# Objective
Yet another PR for migrating stuff to required components. This time,
cameras!
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposal](https://hackmd.io/tsYID4CGRiWxzsgawzxG_g#Combined-Proposal-1-Selected),
deprecate `Camera2dBundle` and `Camera3dBundle` in favor of `Camera2d`
and `Camera3d`.
Adding a `Camera` without `Camera2d` or `Camera3d` now logs a warning,
as suggested by Cart [on
Discord](https://discord.com/channels/691052431525675048/1264881140007702558/1291506402832945273).
I would personally like cameras to work a bit differently and be split
into a few more components, to avoid some footguns and confusing
semantics, but that is more controversial, and shouldn't block this core
migration.
## Testing
I ran a few 2D and 3D examples, and tried cameras with and without
render graphs.
---
## Migration Guide
`Camera2dBundle` and `Camera3dBundle` have been deprecated in favor of
`Camera2d` and `Camera3d`. Inserting them will now also insert the other
components required by them automatically.
# Objective
A step in the migration to required components: scenes!
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposal](https://hackmd.io/@bevy/required_components/%2FPJtNGVMMQhyM0zIvCJSkbA):
- Deprecate `SceneBundle` and `DynamicSceneBundle`.
- Add `SceneRoot` and `DynamicSceneRoot` components, which wrap a
`Handle<Scene>` and `Handle<DynamicScene>` respectively.
## Migration Guide
Asset handles for scenes and dynamic scenes must now be wrapped in the
`SceneRoot` and `DynamicSceneRoot` components. Raw handles as components
no longer spawn scenes.
Additionally, `SceneBundle` and `DynamicSceneBundle` have been
deprecated. Instead, use the scene components directly.
Previously:
```rust
let model_scene = asset_server.load(GltfAssetLabel::Scene(0).from_asset("model.gltf"));
commands.spawn(SceneBundle {
scene: model_scene,
transform: Transform::from_xyz(-4.0, 0.0, -3.0),
..default()
});
```
Now:
```rust
let model_scene = asset_server.load(GltfAssetLabel::Scene(0).from_asset("model.gltf"));
commands.spawn((
SceneRoot(model_scene),
Transform::from_xyz(-4.0, 0.0, -3.0),
));
```
# Objective
Another step in the migration to required components: lights!
Note that this does not include `EnvironmentMapLight` or reflection
probes yet, because their API hasn't been fully chosen yet.
## Solution
As per the [selected
proposals](https://hackmd.io/@bevy/required_components/%2FLLnzwz9XTxiD7i2jiUXkJg):
- Deprecate `PointLightBundle` in favor of the `PointLight` component
- Deprecate `SpotLightBundle` in favor of the `PointLight` component
- Deprecate `DirectionalLightBundle` in favor of the `DirectionalLight`
component
## Testing
I ran some examples with lights.
---
## Migration Guide
`PointLightBundle`, `SpotLightBundle`, and `DirectionalLightBundle` have
been deprecated. Use the `PointLight`, `SpotLight`, and
`DirectionalLight` components instead. Adding them will now insert the
other components required by them automatically.
# Objective
Fixes#14782
## Solution
Enable the lint and fix all upcoming hints (`--fix`). Also tried to
figure out the false-positive (see review comment). Maybe split this PR
up into multiple parts where only the last one enables the lint, so some
can already be merged resulting in less many files touched / less
potential for merge conflicts?
Currently, there are some cases where it might be easier to read the
code with the qualifier, so perhaps remove the import of it and adapt
its cases? In the current stage it's just a plain adoption of the
suggestions in order to have a base to discuss.
## Testing
`cargo clippy` and `cargo run -p ci` are happy.
# Objective
- Followup to #13548
- It added a list of all possible labels to documentation. This seems
hard to keep up and doesn't stop people from making spelling mistake
## Solution
- Add an enum that can create all the labels possible, and encourage its
use rather than manually typed labels
---------
Co-authored-by: Alice Cecile <alice.i.cecile@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Rob Parrett <robparrett@gmail.com>
Allows the user to select a scene to load, then a loading screen is
shown until all assets are loaded, and pipelines compiled.
# Objective
- Fixes#12654
## Solution
- Add desired assets to be monitored to a list.
- While there are assets that are not fully loaded, show a loading
screen.
- Once all assets are loaded, and pipelines compiled, show the scene
that was loaded.
